4 ms·

Not really, since a faster metabolism requires more energy upkeep, and food scarcity has always been one of the biggest selection criteria in nature.

• K0balt 2y ago
  Frequently.
  • vanderZwan 2y ago
    Eh, no, that qualifier does not fix your argument, because it's not a caveat. Natural selection by definition works on which trait outcompetes the other one most frequently, it's a statistical process. There is a reason life works on a sigmoid growth curve and not an exponential growth one.
    • K0balt 2y ago
      I think maybe people thought I was asserting that it was generally a better solution… I was not. But fast reproduction is hardly a rare trait in nature. An ideal solution would be variable rate metabolism, and we see that in species capable of hibernation. Of course slow metabolisms have advantages in resource constrained environments.